Bill Kristol a one-man personification of 2,000+ years of 'anti-Semitism' -which is why the NY Times hired him to Pimp Neo-Con agenda & IRAN WAR...

HE'S AT IT AGAIN! Bill Kristol, the one-man walking personification of 2,000+ years of why there is anti-Semitism, suggests that, should Barak Obama win the election of 2008, President Bush would be MUCH MORE LIKELY TO BOMB IRAN, than if Republican John McCain were to win the election this November.

THE NOTION THAT CONGRESS, NOT the president, must determine if a state of war exists between the United States and another nation DOES NOT ENTER INTO Kristol's calculations.

That is, BILL KRISTOL, the ETERNALLY WRONG Jewish pro-war Fox "news" commentator, editor of the Weakly Standard, and founder and Chairman of the now-disgraced PNAC "NewAmericanCentury.org" think-tank, the think-tank that started advocating the bombing and invasion of Iraq way back in 1997 - that BILL KRISTOL EMBRACES THE NAZI GERMANY "FURHER" model of dictator government for the United States of America, with the President acting as Furher in time of war, with UNLIMITED POWERS TO EXPAND THOSE WARS, powers NOT bound or limited by the US Congress - and of course unlimited, no oversight POLICE STATE POWERS that are identical to those with which the GESTAPO (or KGB, or STAZI) grabbed "state enemies" and whisked them away to torture, indefinite detention, or execution.

Of course, BECAUSE Mr. Kristol is a walking poster-child for 2,000+ years of anti-Semitism, and BECAUSE he is WRONG about everything he has talked or written about in the past dozen years (besides getting George Bush and Dick Cheney to invade Iraq), and BECAUSE PNAC, NewAmericanCentury.org is such a disgraced organization that Mr. Kristol has stopped paying its web-hosting bill (click our link to see for yourself, how the once mighty PNAC site, with signatures from Jeb Bush, Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Donald Kagan, Norm Podhoretz and others, is now found only on the archive sites of other websites, as here.

- BECAUSE Mr. Kristol is chronically WRONG, because he is chronically ARROGANT, because he chronically DESPISES free and fair and verifiable elections in America, and because he supports an ever expanding, ever more MURDEROUS WAR MACHINE and police state powers - precisely BECAUSE of those awful reasons, ARTHUR SULZBERGER, the owner and publisher of the NEW YORK TIMES, has HIRED Mr. Kristol to write for the Times!

Far from a "liberal media" organization, the NEW YORK TIMES is a facist 'news' organization with NAZI-esque OVERTONES - the Jewish "heritage" of Mr. Sulzberger and the majority of his writers and editors not-withstanding, the Times is a decidedly PRO-WAR, pro-police-state-powers organization which not only apologizes for the Lies-to-war of the Bush administration, but acted as a willing participant and megaphone in broadcasting many of those lies in a run-up to the unilateral attack, invasion, and astonishingly corrupt US occupation of Iraq.

Oldie but baddie: Kristol suggests that if American children come down with illnesses, but do not have health insurance, they should JUST GO AHEAD and DIE already -

"WHENEVER I HEAR ABOUT A HEARTLESS ASSAULT ON AMERICA's SCHOOLCHILDREN, I TEND TO THINK IT IS A GOOD IDEA" (chuckles)

BOWING TO ISRAEL and the Republican War Lobby, House Democrats WILL VOTE FOR WAR (blockade) on IRAN

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Even the Inveterate Liars at the New York Times report accurately - - if you wait patiently enough, and read carefully.

Even the lying NEW YORK TIMES must report accurately every so often. According to HuffPost contributor Robert Naiman, Mr. Bush's latest foray into international doublespeak is no more, and no less, than a fig leaf over the Bush administration's PLANS TO EXPAND THE US WARS IN THE MIDDLE EAST, with a NAVAL BLOCKADE of Iran.

<< Who is the audience for this "show" [President Bush's fake "generous offer" to Iran]? People who don't read the New York Times, apparently. These people will be told that "all efforts at dialogue" have been exhausted and there is no alternative to "other punitive moves against Iran that could be taken by a 'coalition of the willing' outside the United Nations":

[Mr. Naiman quotes the Times story directly:]
"Officials would not provide details, but analysts suggest those could include a naval embargo of the Persian Gulf or the refusal to supply Western-made technology required for Iran's oil industry, creating bottlenecks in Iran's oil production."

[Naiman continues:]
For those scoring at home, A NAVAL EMBARGO WOULD BE AN ACT OF WAR. If undertaken "outside the United Nations" -- i.e. without the authorization of the UN Security Council -- it would be a war crime. If you don't think Iran would retaliate for this act of war, or that it doesn't have effective means of doing so, then you are, as John McCain might say, "naïve and inexperienced."

Once again a FALSE CHOICE is placed before the world -- the FAKE DIPLOMACY of the Bush administration, or war. Are there no other alternatives? >>

==================================================

NYT Exposes the Fraud of Bush "Generous Offer" to Iran
by Robert Naiman
17 June 2008
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naiman/nyt-exposes-fraud-of-gene_b_107569.html

Who says America doesn't have a free press?

Everything you know about the world will be reported by the New York Times -- eventually.

You just have to be very patient -- and read very carefully.

On Sunday, the New York Times reported that President Bush "accused" Iran of rejecting a new set of incentives to stop enriching uranium. "I am disappointed that the leaders rejected this generous offer out of hand," Bush said.

Of course, Iran didn't reject it "out of hand," as the article goes on to explain:

Tehran did not formally reject the offer... Mr. Mottaki [Iran's Foreign Minister] said that Iran's response would depend on how the West responded to Iran's May 13 proposal calling for international talks on all issues and improved international inspection of Iran's nuclear facilities.
Nor was it true that President Bush was disappointed:

The French and Americans presumed in advance that their new proposal of incentives ... would be brushed aside by Tehran, officials and diplomats said, insisting on anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue.
[Presumably, "sensitivity of the issue" means "because they are not supposed to be quoted on the record saying that the 'diplomatic' initiative is a charade."]

So, in the space of thirteen words, President Bush managed to lie (at least) twice.

Was it a "generous offer"? That of course is a matter of perspective. Iran is being offered a package of economic incentives to give up what Iranians -- not just the government, but Iranians generally -- regard as a fundamental right -- mastery of the technology to enrich uranium. As Iran's UN Ambassador told the Boston Globe on May 31, "This has become an issue of national pride." As the NYT notes, the same deal was offered in the past, and Iran rejected it.

Regardless of whether anyone in Washington agrees that Iran has the right to enrich uranium, it is an objective fact that Iranians generally, not just the government, believe that Iran has the right to enrich uranium.

In April, the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland published a poll of Iranian public opinion. PIPA found that 81% of Iranians consider it "very important" for "Iran to have a full-fuel-cycle nuclear program" which would give Iran the capacity to produce nuclear fuel for energy production. Four out of five. Only 5% think Iran should not pursue a full-fuel-cycle program.

So, the United States and its allies made a proposal for Iran to give up something that four out of five Iranians consider to be "very important." The United States and its allies expected Iran to reject the "offer," as it has in the past.

Why the charade? The NYT explains:

But Mr. Bush and the Europeans who formally made the offer want to show that all efforts at dialogue are being taken.
So, "all efforts at dialogue" means restating a proposal that the government of Iran has already rejected -- and which Iran is expected, by those making the proposal, to reject again -- to give up something that four in five Iranians say is "very important."

Who is the audience for this "show"? People who don't read the New York Times, apparently. These people will be told that "all efforts at dialogue" have been exhausted and there is no alternative to "other punitive moves against Iran that could be taken by a 'coalition of the willing' outside the United Nations":

"Officials would not provide details, but analysts suggest those could include a naval embargo of the Persian Gulf or the refusal to supply Western-made technology required for Iran's oil industry, creating bottlenecks in Iran's oil production."
For those scoring at home, a naval embargo would be an act of war. If undertaken "outside the United Nations" -- i.e. without the authorization of the UN Security Council -- it would be a war crime. If you don't think Iran would retaliate for this act of war, or that it doesn't have effective means of doing so, then you are, as John McCain might say, "naïve and inexperienced."

Once again a false choice is placed before the world -- the fake diplomacy of the Bush administration or war. Are there no other alternatives?

The same PIPA poll found that 58% of Iranians support the idea of making a deal with the UN Security Council that would allow Iran to have a full-cycle nuclear program while giving the International Atomic Energy Agency "permanent and full access throughout Iran to ensure that its nuclear program is limited to energy production" and not producing nuclear weapons. PIPA notes that in a March 2008 poll for the BBC World Service 55% of Americans approved of such a deal.

Indeed, in its May 13 proposal -- which the NYT dismisses in a phrase by noting that it "does not mention the key Western demand -- that Iran stop enriching uranium," Iran proposed "international talks on all issues and improved international inspection of Iran's nuclear facilities."

Furthermore, as the Boston Globe reported May 31, Iran's UN Ambassador said Iran "would consider establishing an internationally owned consortium inside Iran that could produce nuclear fuel with Iranian participation."

As the Boston Globe noted on June 10, "Thomas Pickering, the US ambassador to the United Nations under President George H.W. Bush, endorsed the idea of such a consortium in a March article in the New York Review of Books." And the plan is "getting increased interest from senior members of both parties in Congress and nonproliferation specialists":

Senators Dianne Feinstein, a California Democrat, and Chuck Hagel, a Nebraska Republican, have said publicly that the plan should be explored.
Representative Edward J. Markey, a Malden Democrat, went further, calling the plan "a creative, thoughtful, and productive potential solution."



And Joseph Cirincione, a "nonproliferation specialist who serves informally as an adviser to Obama's campaign," says the idea is "worth exploring."

So there is an alternative. But you wouldn't know it from the "show."

If you think Congress should be pressing for real diplomacy with Iran, you can ask them to do so here.


More in Media...

The sleazly, traitorous, ChickenHawk Liars at FOX 'news" ENDANGER AMERICAN LIVES.....

Buzzflash.com Editor Mark Karlin "GETS IT RIGHT": FOX 'news', the right-wing PROPAGANDA MEGAPHONE for Australian tycoon RUPERT MURDOCH, is a DANGER to American democracy, and thus to America's national security and international security as well.

What should be remembered is, the Neo-Cons who Murdoch and his "news" division flunkie, Roger Ailes, hire and give so much broadcast time to - Chickenhawk liars such as BILL KRISTOL, SEAN HANNITY, and BILL O'REILLY - are CONTEMPTUOUS of international NUCLEAR NON-PROLIFERATION TREATIES, which is why the world has seen a RASH OF NUCLEAR PROLIFERATION since George W. Bush and Dick Cheney stole the White House, aided by Mr. Murdoch, who hired Bush cousin JOHN ELLIS to.. CALL THE FLORIDA vote, and thereby the 2000 election, for his cousin, GEORGE W. BUSH!
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2000/nov/19/uselections2000.usa2


The TRAITORS at FOX 'news' believe INTIMIDATION and PROPAGANDA should at all times TRUMP FREE, FAIR, and VERIFIABLE ELECTIONS.... the original sin of the disaster for America that is the past 8 years of the Bush-Cheney administration.
===================================

How FOX News Endangers My Life!
by Mark Karlin Editor and Publisher
June 15, 2008
http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/editorblog/096


The FOX Propaganda Network endangers my life -- and yours.

How else can you explain that a White House adminsitration and Republican Party who have squandered hundreds of billions of dollars, countless lives, and a war longer than WW II -- and we haven't even caught Osama bin Laden?

The FOX Propaganda Network isn't set up to help save America from terrorists; it's the "Tokyo Rose" of television networks, set up to save the Republican plutocrats from the wrath of the voters who might otherwise realize the sheer and utter incompetence of Bush, Cheney and the GOP in dealing with terrorism.

Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Michelle Malkin and the entire multi-million dollar compensated on-air talents are traitors because their job is to protect the back and flank of the GOP, not to protect America.

And that is what puts my life at risk -- and yours.

Sean Hannity is no patriot. He is an oleaginous, slicked up car salesman chickenhawk who has sold America and us down the river for his paycheck.

One of the charecteristics that we are most proud of about America is our ingenuity, our tenaciousness, our resilience.

Yet, the FOX Propaganda Network has spent the last years supporting moribund, stone headed, unwavering failure.

If you think being a chronic loser is patriotic, then FOX is the station for you, because that's what it backs. That's not patriotic; it's contrary to what made America great.

What made America great is competence and ingenuity, not slavish dedication to the architects of defeat.

FOX is a traitor in our midst. Yes, they have their First Amendment rights, and no one is going to deny Sean Hannity his $40,000 plus speaking fees and private jet transportation.

But they should be shunned for the risk they help to create to all our lives by endlessly championing dolts, proven liars, and leaders who turn gold into cow dung.

All FOX proves in its propaganda angle is that a few thousand hearty potential terrorists, at most, have held the world's strongest power at bay for years, while ruining our economy with onerous and ineffectual war expenses, helping to weaken the dollar, drive up the price of oil, and, in turn, helping to cause a world food crisis and more.

It used to be the American way that if you couldn't do the job, you got out of the way or got fired.

But the fat paycheck propagandists at FOX now tell us that mediocrity and failure define the new American patriotism -- that and an American flag lapel pin made in China.

God have mercy on their souls -- and let's hope that we can survive the glorification that FOX gives to losers who imperil our lives.

We need an America that proves itself by getting the job done; not by relying on Roger Ailes GOP propaganda talking points to divert the masses from people who have utterly failed them.

US corporate media reprises its Goebbelsesque Lies-to-War abject corruption: 58 PERMANENT BASES IN IRAQ story given NO media coverage

The US media is now in full JOSEPH GOEBBELS mode: "We CONQUERED POLAND fair and square, and there is no way in 10,000 years that it will not become a permanent part of the Greater American Reich."

As to the thousands of Iraqis who are not too happy to have this American neo-colonialism shoved down their throats by Blackwater bullets and USAF/Navy bombs, well, the Washington Cowardly Post and the New York Lying Sulzberger-owned Times have an answer for them: "YOU DON'T COUNT, your miserable hides are worth no more of our concern than some _______ victim being marched off to oblivion."

"Don't forget... what we did to Fallujah we would LOVE to do to every other city and town in Iraq!"

(Oldie but baddie: ARTHUR SULZBERGER's NEW YORK lying TIMES publishes house columnist WILLIAM SAFIRE's calls for - - - "PACIFICATION" of Fallujah, (Warsaw ghetto fashion?), April 7, 2007
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F01E6DD1738F934A35757C0A9629C8B63

============================================

US Wants 58 Bases In Iraq, Shiite Lawmakers Say
June 9, 2008
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/40372.html

McClatchy reports the U.S. is demanding 58 military bases in Iraq as part of a "status of forces" agreement that would allow American troops to remain in Iraq indefinitely:

Iraqi lawmakers say the United States is demanding 58 bases as part of a proposed "status of forces" agreement that will allow U.S. troops to remain in the country indefinitely.

Leading members of the two ruling Shiite parties said in a series of interviews the Iraqi government rejected this proposal along with another U.S. demand that would have effectively handed over to the United States the power to determine if a hostile act from another country is aggression against Iraq. Lawmakers said they fear this power would drag Iraq into a war between the United States and Iran.

"The points that were put forth by the Americans were more abominable than the occupation," said Jalal al Din al Saghir, a leading lawmaker from the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq. "We were occupied by order of the Security Council," he said, referring to the 2004 Resolution mandating a U.S. military occupation in Iraq at the head of an international coalition. "But now we are being asked to sign for our own occupation. That is why we have absolutely refused all that we have seen so far."



The proposed "status of forces" agreement could lead to an uprising in Iraq, according to a leading Iraqi cleric:

A leading Iraqi Shiite cleric said Monday the status of forces agreement between Washington and Baghdad could lead to an uprising in Iraq.

"It is not to the benefit of the U.S. as a major power to lessen the sovereignty of Iraq. This treaty is humiliating to the Iraqi people, and might cause an uprising against it and those who support it," Grand Ayatollah Mohammad al-Modarresi told the Iranian state-run English-language service, Press TV.

Modarresi said the strategic framework between Iraq and the United States needs a full understanding of the situation in Iraq before negotiations on the arrangement proceed. "It will surely fail if kept as it is," he said.

Even the "major" corporate media forced to acknowledge: America taken to war in Iraq on a chorus of lies....

Even American 'major media' and Congress forced to admit: The US invasion and occupation of Iraq was brought about by a premeditated chorus of LIES from the Bush-Cheney-Rove-Rumsfeld-Wolfowitz-Libby White House and Dept. of Defense....
by Dave Lindorff
Fri, 06/06/2008
http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/lindorff/107


The last couple of weeks have brought confirmation -- as if it were needed -- even in the corporate media that President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, and the gang of thugs and sycophants around them in the White House, engaged in a massive conspiracy to lie the country into a war in Iraq.

The release of a confessional book by former White House press secretary Scott McClellan and the subsequent release of a long blocked report by the Senate Intelligence Committee make it clear that Bush, Cheney, & Company deliberately lied to Congress and the American public back in 2002 and early 2003 about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein (there was none). McClellan also states that Bush and Cheney conspired to "out" CIA undercover operative Valerie Plame Wilson, as part of a campaign to prevent her husband from exposing a major part of that campaign of lies: the claim that Saddam Hussein was seeking to build nuclear weapons.

It would be hard to overstate the extent of or the damage caused by these crimes that are now exposed to the light of day.

Beginning in 2001, making the most cynical use of the tragic killing of nearly 3,000 Americans in the 9-11 attacks, Bush and Cheney moved to aggrandize as much power as possible in the executive branch, and then to consolidate that power grab, engineered a full-scale war against Iraq, enabling them to claim that any opponent of their dictatorial usurpation of power was a traitor to the nation.

It was all a lie.

Saddam Hussein had no links to Al Qaeda, and he had no nuclear program. He had no weapons of mass destruction. His country was broken, thanks to years of international sanctions and war.

As a result of these lies, we have a country that no longer even remotely resembles what the Founders had intended. The Congress has been shorn of its once exclusive authority to legislate, and even its Constitutional power to investigate the executive branch has been successfully defied. It is now an atrophied relic. The federal judiciary, right up to the Supreme Court, has been packed with administration sycophants and Federalist Society advocates of unfettered executive power.

We also have been saddled with an unwinnable war in the Middle East that has claimed the lives of 4,500 Americans, destroyed the lives of another 30,000 -- or perhaps several hundred thousand, if we add in all those suffering psychological damage, or genetic damage from exposure to depleted uranium weapons. That war has also killed over 1 million innocent Iraqis, including countless children, destroyed their country, bankrupted this nation, and made the U.S. a pariah and a rogue state in the eyes of the rest of the world.

Most Americans long since came to the conclusion that the Bush Administration was a gang of idiots. Just watching their handling of the Hurricane Katrina disaster unfold was enough to make that clear. But the new reports from McClellan and from the Senate Intelligence Committee should make it clear that this was not just stupidity. The disasters that have befallen this nation, or that it has brought on the rest of the world, over the past eight years have been the result of deliberate lying and deceit and of the conspiratorial policies of a cabal of leaders whose goal from day one was undoing the Constitution and establishing the presidency as a kind of dictatorship.

Most of the corporate media have been unable to bring themselves to state this clearly. They edge around the issue by talking about the White House having been "misleading" or "untruthful." And little is said about the lasting damage that has been done to the Republic and the Constitution, or about what is to be done about a still bloody war that never should have been fought in the first place.

The sad, ugly truth: The Jewish owned NEW YORK TIMES pimped the bombing, invasion & occupation of Iraq, in Joseph Goebbels' lying, propaganda fashion

Disgraceful. Despicable. Murderous. Liars. Naziesque propaganda.

Adolf Hitler's bellicose excuses to invade and occupy Poland, but coming instead from the Jewish owned New York Times urging the US invasion of Iraq.

Mr. Arthur Sulzberger, his family, and his editors and writers THE MOST INFLUENTIAL war-pimps in all of America - over and above Fox "news"; over the Rev. Moon owned Washington Times; more influential than the Wall St. Journal or any of the Scaife or Murdoch papers.... on the Bush-Cheney-Wolfowitz-Feith-PNAC-JUDITH MILLER relentless, remorseless lead-up to the Iraq War, the editors of the NEW YORK TIMES were THE MOST INFLUENTIAL war-mongers and PROPAGANDA BROADCASTERS in all of America...

Mr. Sulzberger, the thousands of dead Americans, tens of thousands of wounded and traumatized Americans, and hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis, thank you for your appalling journey into journalistic infamy and relentless lies.

(Which are right there in black and white, in the archived pages of The Times, should anyone have the time and dedication to examine them.
But in writing "The Hunting of The President", Lyons and Conason's huge volume on the atrocious "Whitewater" reporting, a veritable bible of the Times and Post atrocious 'reporting' about the various fake scandals swirling around the Clinton White House, the authors compiled _25 pages_ of mostly single-line footnotes and well documented sources.)

========================================

Scott McClellan Mocks NYT -- On 4th Anniversary of Paper's Weak 'Mini-culpa' on the War

by Greg Mitchell
Posted May 27, 2008
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/greg-mitchell/scott-mcclellan-mocks-nyt_b_103808.html

In a supreme irony, word leaked out about bombshell revelations in the upcoming Scott McClellan memoir -- including his unexpected charge that the "liberal media" fell for Bush "propaganda" on Iraq -- exactly four years from the day from The New York Times offered its famous "mini-culpa" on its role in helping to pave the way for war.

The Times, you remember, reluctantly published a short piece, admitting that a half dozen of its stories in the run-up to the war were fatally flawed, but didn't name any of the guilty scribes and buried the story on Page A10 - about where many of its articles that had raised doubts about Saddam's WMD had ended up.

Now here is McClellan in his book, What Happened, as quoted by Mike Allen of Politico.com, admitting that the Times and other media had been too easily hoodwinked by the White House. He calls them "enablers" in the march to war.

McClellan charges that Bush relied on "propaganda" to sell the war. Allen summarizes: "He says the White House press corps was too easy on the administration during the run-up to the war....McClellan repeatedly embraces the rhetoric of Bush's liberal critics."

In the book, McClellan charges: "If anything, the national press corps was probably too deferential to the White House and to the administration in regard to the most important decision facing the nation during my years in Washington, the choice over whether to go to war in Iraq. The collapse of the administration's rationales for war, which became apparent months after our invasion, should never have come as such a surprise. ... In this case, the 'liberal media' didn't live up to its reputation. If it had, the country would have been better served."

Ouch.

E&P was one of the few "mainstream" publications to repeatedly raise serious questions about the case for war before the invasion. In the months after the attack, we often charged that the Times had been duped and questioned why it refused to come clean. Executive Editor Bill Keller mocked some of the critics (and later stood by Judith Miller through thick and thin).

Finally, on May 27, 2004, the paper ran an editors' note, copping to some of the charges. But the paper tried to shield the guilty parties, and I was first online to identify by name the authors of the six pieces in question, with Miller turning out to be most guilty, and Michael Gordon also having a hand in two stories.

The paper refused to penalize any reporters or editors for their failures. Jack Shafer of Slate memorably called the mea culpa a "mini-culpa."

Perhaps most embarrassing, the paper's reluctant review sparked some other papers that had carried the faulty Times accounts in 2002 and 2003 to run corrections of their own. Many of them placed their own apologies in far more prominent positions than did the Times.

And clearly Keller had been reluctant to own up to the misreporting at all, at least in that time frame. Consider that my assessment of the Times' report, carried the day it appeared, closed with this: "But Executive Editor Bill Keller continues to defend the editors' note, and blamed 'overwrought' critics for overreacting to the Times's WMD coverage. Asked why he finally published the editors' note, Keller (quoted in the Washington Post) replied: 'Mainly because it was a distraction. This buzz about our coverage had become a kind of conventional wisdom, much of it overwrought and misinformed.'

"With his managing editor, Jill Abramson, he penned a memo to staffers explaining that the critique in the paper was 'not an attempt to find a scapegoat or to blame reporters for not knowing then what we know now.'

The problem of course was that certain reporters ignored, or only paid lip service to, evidence that "we know now' - but (as some Knight Ridder reporters showed) was often also available then."

But don't take my word for it. Ask Scott McClellan.

Greg Mitchell's new book is So Wrong for So Long: How the Press, the Pundits -- and the President -- Failed on Iraq. It features a preface by Bruce Springsteen and a foreword by Joe Galloway.

"Queen Furious Over Photo Deal!" stammers AOL 'news'. AOL barely concerned that GOP and Dem presidential candidates INVOKE MURDER of their opponent!

Queen Furious Over $1 Million Photo Deal" stammers one AOL headline....
Posted by AP on May 25, 2008
http://news.aol.com/story/_a/queen-furious-over-1-million-photo-deal/20080524145709990001?icid=1616058736x1203048523x1200306638

(May 24) - A British newspaper says the Canadian bride of the Queen's eldest grandson is being blamed for a controversial deal with celebrity magazine Hello! for exclusive photos of their wedding at Windsor Castle.

While the REAL news.... that BOTH Republican Arkansas Governor and presidential candidate MIKE HUCKABEE, AND New York Democrat Senator and presidential candidate HILLARY CLINTON, BOTH INVOKED the POTENTIAL MURDER of their presidential campaign opponent, Illinois Junior Sen tor Barak Obama, as (respectively) either a "good joke" or a "good reason" to stay in the Democratic primary race!

AOL, AP, the New York Times, the Washington Post, Fox 'news' and the entire chorus of the whore-iffic "major media" make the Queen's shouted protests about a $1 million wedding photo deal MORE IMPORTANT than both Democrat and Republican presidential candidates INVOKING THE SPECTER OF MURDER of a rival presidential candidate!

IT IS THIS ABILITY of the American "mainstream media" to DETERMINE WHAT MAKES THE HEADLINES, for example, the shouted, accusatory headlines against Senator Obama's links to Rev. Wright for a 20 second clip of an otherwise routine "hellfire and damnation" Sunday morning sermon for weeks on end; and what gets left on the cutting room floor, as in the case of Senator Clinton INVOKING MURDER as a GOOD reason to remain in the Democratic primary race!

Above is America OnLine's all important "news" that millions of Americans should know: that the Queen is furious that her grand-daughter, who does not have the resources of billions of taxpayer dollars like the British regent does, sold exclusive rights to her wedding photographs for one million dollars.

Below are Hillary Clinton's DISGRACEFUL, DISGUSTING, downright GHOULISH "good reasons" to stay in the Democratic primary race - her rival might just be MURDERED by some of those racist White, gun-loving voters that the Senator has been appealing to in Ohio, Texas, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Kentucky, and throughout America these past 4 months!
Below that, Gov. Huckabee's "Senator Obama knocks over chair running away from a gunman aiming rifle" "JOKE" during his speech AT NRA (gun lovers) CONFERENCE!
And below that, "COUNTDOWN" news show host Keith Olbermann, the rare, non-obsequious, non-liar network news anchor, COMPILES SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON'S OTHER disgusting, low-class, race-baiting, SMEAR her opponent, DEMEAN the probable Democratic nominee comments....

The COWARDLY, CRAVEN, LYING, Neo-Con WAR-MONGERING PROPAGANDA New York Times outed... by the NY Times STUPIDITY Index!

There is a simple reason that the monstrous, economy-gutting BUSH BUDGET DEFICITS charts shown here are not on the front page of the New York Times two and three times a week:
BECAUSE THE WAR-MONGERING Neo-Con NY TIMES _SUPPORTS_ the Bush-Cheney agenda of EVER EXPANDING WARS of aggression and death-squad pro-US DICTATORSHIPS in the Middle East and Central Asia....

note: Independent confirmation that Mr. John Wilson's commentary, below, is correct, that ARTHUR SULZBERGER is a lying yellow-press media whore, and that his writers and editors are PAID PROFESSIONAL LIARS: this link highlights that Mr. Sulzberger's latest "proud" aquisition, NEO-CON "PNAC" Chairman BILL KRISTOL - is WRONG about _EVERYTHING_ that he writes about!
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/05/19/kristol-primaries/
(Note: Mr. Kristol is SO PROUD of his NewAmericanCentury.org think-tank... that he has STOPPED PAYING THE BILL for its web-hosting! Click the link to see for yourself.)

- And here is Kristol's infamous SNEER at American school-children who might DIE of preventable diseases because, without health care coverage, they may go undiagnosed for a disease which could become malignant and kill that child before it is treated in timely fashion-


BILL KRISTOL's (and hence his new employer, the ARTHUR SULZBERGER NEW YORK TIMES) SCORN and CONTEMPT for American schoolchildren is INDISTINGUISHABLE from the SCORN and CONTEMPT that Nazi Concentration-Camp guards had for STARVING, EMACIATED death camp prisoners!

ALL THE MORE ATROCIOUS, because Kristol uses the sneer of "SOCIALISM!" to deride and pour scorn on health-care policies for AMERICAN children... WHILE he SUPPORTS AMERICAN taxpayers pouring BILLIONS of our tax-dollars overseas TO ISRAEL, where, in European "socialized" fashion, ALL _Israeli_ CITIZENS ARE ENTITLED TO HEALTH-CARE COVERAGE - AT AMERICAN TAXPAYER EXPENSE!

And, re posted: DOUGLAS FEITH, the Pentagon's "INVADE IRAQ NOW!" PNAC war-mongering Propaganda Minister in 2002, had the MEGAPHONE of the NEW YORK TIMES former NIXON speechwriter WILLIAM SAFIRE to shout and BROADCAST their lust-for-war across America:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-fiderer/how-douglas-feith-and-wil_b_95740.html

The Neo-Confederate agenda of EXPANDING WARS, (defacto-slavery prison camps) POLICE-STATE POWERS, Tax-Cuts for the wealthy, and TREASURY GUTTING DEFICITS (see above graph) strongest, most vocal supporters in all of America: JOE LIEBERMAN, the AIPAC lobby, and the NEW YORK TIMES!




(note: While Mr. John K. Wilson's analysis of the Times' coverage focuses on their writing about the Hillary Clinton campaign, Mr. Wilson points out that the entire article on that campaign OMITS DISCUSSION of Senator Hillary Clinton's IRAQ WAR VOTE and her even more appalling KYLE-LIEBERMAN ("BOMB IRAN NOW!") vote - the Times' "reporter" can't even see the White Elephant or 800-pound gorrilla in the room!)

=======================================

The New York Times' Shoddy Strange Analysis Of The Clinton Loss
by John K. Wilson, Huffington Post
Posted May 19, 2008
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-k-wilson/the-new-york-timess-shodd_b_102537.html


Adam Nagourney of the New York Times just posted his column from tomorrow analyzing "the factors and developments that undercut her candidacy, some self-inflicted, others inflicted upon her." It’s truly one of the dumbest pieces of political punditry I’ve seen in this election, and it takes a lot to say that. Amazingly, Nagourney explains Clinton’s loss without ever mentioning her vote on the war in Iraq, the incompetence of Mark Penn and her campaign staff, the strength of Obama’s candidacy, or the brilliance of the Obama’s campaign strategy.


To rate each reason Nagourney gives, I’ve created the NSI: the New York Times Stupidity Index, with a rating from 1 to 10 (10 being stupidest) of how dumb these reasons are.

Nagourney begins with the "timing of the Edwards endorsement" after Clinton’s West Virginia win. Considering that the election was over long before John Edwards figured out which way the wind was blowing, this is a bizarre reason to start off a column about Clinton’s loss.



NSI: 10 (out of 10)


Nagourney cites Michigan and Florida, claiming that Clinton’s likely (inevitable?) victories there would have given her a boost going into Super Tuesday if they had counted for half-delegates as the Republicans did. That’s not too persuasive: if Obama had competed in Michigan and Florida, he would have done better there, and remember that this is an expectations game above all else. Michigan and Florida also would have stretched Clinton’s weak financial position.
NSI: 2

The Drudge Report. According to Nagourney, "bad news about the Clinton campaign got extensive attention" on the Drudge Report, after an October NYTimes report on how the Clinton campaign was working with Drudge. This is nonsense. The Drudge Report is a playground for bad reporters, not a major influence on how people vote. Clinton got bad news on the website because her campaign was failing, not because of Drudge blowback.
NSI: 8

The Tipping Scandal. Nagourney blames a false NPR report that Clinton had stiffed a waiter on a tip for "feeding the image of Mrs. Clinton as entitled and imperious." Oh, please. Did anyone pay any attention to this piece of crap story?
NSI: 8

Immigrants Behind the Wheel. This may be the only real effect identified by Nagourney. When Clinton waffled on the question about Spitzer and immigrant driver’s licenses, she looked a lot like her husband. This was not very important in itself, but it mattered because the media finally realized that she might not be inevitable.
NSI: 1

The Return of Joe Trippi. Nagourney claims that under Trippi "the pitch of the Edwards campaign instantly turned more populist and tougher, and took aim at Mrs. Clinton." Edwards did become more populist, but Edwards never really went very negative, and he also took aim at Obama (especially on health care). Edwards’ populist ploy pushed progressive votes away from Obama, so I can’t see any real harm to Clinton here.
NSI: 4

Bill Clinton. According to Nagourney, "It seems hard to argue that Mr. Clinton was anything but a net negative for Mrs. Clinton overall." That’s utter nonsense. Virtually every poll has shown that voters were more likely to vote for Hillary because of Bill. The problem was that everyone expected Bill to be a huge positive for Hillary, and instead his flubs greatly reduced the positive value he provided.
NSI: 4

Planted Questions and False Rumors. Nagourney: "It is hard to exaggerate how much damage Mrs. Clinton suffered from two things that her supporters got busted for doing...." No, it’s not hard to exaggerate, because Nagourney does wildly exaggerate it. The story about planted questions lasted barely a day and disappeared, and nobody really blamed Clinton for a few supporters who pushed the bigoted emails about Obama that roam around the internet like mosquitos.
NSI: 5

Altogether, these eight reasons mark some of the most inexplicably trivial and stupid explanations of why Hillary Clinton lost. But most of all, they ignore the key reason: Obama is the better candidate. Unfortunately, if this is the kind of political analysis we have to look forward to from the mainstream press this year, it will require us to push the real truth told by alternative media. You couldn’t trust the New York Times when it was pretending that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, so why you would trust the New York Times pretending that Clinton’s vote for war didn’t hurt her campaign?


Read more at John K Wilson's Daily Kos Diary. Crossposted at ObamaPolitic

Media CENSORS "Retired Military officers as Pentagon's WAR PROFITEERS PROPAGANDA NETWORK" story....

'Deafening' silence on analyst story
By MICHAEL CALDERONE & AVI ZENILMAN
May 10, 2008
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0508/10204.html



Even with countless media outlets available these days, a Sunday New York Times cover story could always be counted on to send a jolt through the television news cycle.

But apparently that’s no longer the case. Indeed, reporter David Barstow’s 7,600-word investigation of the Pentagon’s military analyst program — whereby ex-military talking heads, often with direct ties to contractors, parroted Defense Department talking points on the air — has been noticeably absent from television airwaves since the story broke on April 20.

While bloggers have kept the story simmering, Democratic congressional leaders also are speaking out, calling for investigations that could provoke the networks to finally cover the Times story — and, in effect, themselves.

On Tuesday, Reps. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) and John Dingell (D-Mich.) sent a letter to Federal Communications Commission Chairman Kevin J. Martin “urging an investigation of the Pentagon’s propaganda program” to determine if the networks or analysts violated federal law.

FCC Commissioner Michael J. Copps, a Democrat, applauded their efforts. “President Eisenhower warned against the excesses of a military-industrial complex,” Copps said in a statement. “I’d like to think that hasn’t morphed into a military-industrial-media complex, but reports of spinning the news through a program of favored insiders don’t inspire a lot of confidence.”

DeLauro said by phone that the Pentagon’s program was “created in order to give military analysts access in exchange for positive coverage of the Iraq war.”

The FCC request follows DeLauro’s April 24 letters to five of the most powerful network executives: NBC News President Steve Capus, ABC News President David Westin, CBS News President Sean McManus, FOX News chief executive Roger Ailes and CNN News Group President Jim Walton.

Only ABC and CNN have responded so far, according to DeLauro, who is not the only member of Congress calling attention to the Times story.

Both Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) have written to the Government Accountability Office, seeking an investigation into whether the Pentagon aided in connecting military analysts with contractors.

“I decided to push this issue hard because ever since The New York Times exposé appeared, the silence has been deafening,” Kerry said in statement to Politico.

Kerry said there needs to be a “thorough investigation” into government contracts and “whether Americans’ tax dollars were being used to cultivate talking heads to sell the administration’s Iraq policy.”

Others involved include Michigan Sen. Carl Levin, who wrote to Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.), who told Think Progress he’s begun to “distrust the military,” and Rep. Ike Skelton (D-Mo.), who said on the House floor that the Times story reflects poorly on the Pentagon, analysts and media organizations.

Congressional outcries alone might not be enough, but if investigations yield any new discoveries or lead to high-profile hearings, the networks would be hard-pressed to continue their de facto blackout.

American media tries to UNDERMINE DEMOCRACY in Bolivia (and, indeed, everywhere in world)

1803- At the same time that the US Marines were "fighting for Right and Freedom...to the shores of Tripoli", against Barbary Coast slavers on the North Africa coastline, the American merchant fleet and US Navy would be EXPANDING the SLAVE TRADE of enslaved Africans from West African ports for three more decades, until the transatlantic slave trade was finally outlawed.
--------------------------------------

For all the bloody-flag waving of Bush administration supporters shouting that they support "FREEDOM and DEMOCRACY!", the ugly truth is that America does NOT support freedom or democracy, at least not in 'under-developed' third-world nations where, Manifest Destiny or conquistador style, American corporate barons think there are good profits to be made extorting the wealth - in natural resources or cheap production labor - out of the natives.
This is actually an ancient strand of the American national identity. At the very same time that US Marines were bragging about "Fighting for Right And Freedom" against the Barbary Pirates (Muslim warlords on North African coast, who were capturing and enslaving European and American sailors in the white-slave trade), the American Navy was riding shotgun for - the transatlantic SLAVE TRADE from West African ports! This "good vs. evil," "slavery vs. freedom" dichotomy (or dual nature) is of course ingrained in all humans across the world, but especially in the young American Republic, founded on ideals of "freedom and democracy," but from the Three-Fifths compromise on, SLAVERY was embedded in the US Constitution, and 13 of the first 15 US presidents were or had been SLAVE OWNERS, including of course Presidents Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Jackson, and other 'statesmen' of whom we Americans today are so proud.

WELL, America is up to it again! For all of the Bush administration's "Freedom!" and "Democracy" rhetoric, they DESPISE the popular vote, whether in the United States (Al Gore's 500,000+ vote popular majority in the 2000 presidential election was negated by the vote-swiping efforts of the Republican presidential candidate's brother, Governor Jeb Bush in Florida) much less overseas in lands populated by despised "brown-skin" locals.

Case in point: BOLIVIA. The people of countries like Bolivia of course are disgusted at the ECONOMIC HIT MAN model of capitalism, indeed, the very term "Free Market Capitalism" is a PROPAGANDA INVERSION, a term which means not FREE markets, but CONTROLLED markets, markets where huge international corporations can buy up a nation's resources for pennies on the dollar, in rigged bids, by BRIBING the elite families of the targeted cities and countries, giving local citizens NO say in the outcome of RIGGED financial manipulations. (i.e., "freedom" = economic slavery)
(Author John Perkins own website) http://www.johnperkins.org/


IN a _text-book_ example right out of the Economic Hit Man model of international financial EXTORTIONS, the Bush administration is urging the wealthy community of Santa Cruz, Bolivia's wealthiest province, to stage a mini-palace coup against the more populist administration of Bolivia president Evo Morales.

Before you read the GlobalAlternatives.org summary of the Bush-Cheney administration's democracy-gutting attempts at financial EXTORTION in Santa Cruz and Bolivia, read as many excerpts as you can stand from the free on-line GoogleBooks preview of Confessions of an Economic Hitman.



United States Maneuvers to Carve Up Bolivia with Autonomy Vote
By Roger Burbach
May 5, 2008
http://globalalternatives.org/node/86

The illegal referendum held on Sunday to declare autonomy in Santa Cruz, Bolivia’s richest province, is backed by the Bush administration in an attempt to halt the leftward drift of South America. While the US embassy in La Paz blandly declares its support for “unity and democracy” in Bolivia, the government’s Interior Minister Alfredo Raba states what is widely known, that the United States “has an agenda more political than diplomatic in Bolivia, and this agenda is linked to opponents of the current government.” Evo Morales, the first indigenous president of the country, bluntly declares: “The imperialist project is to try to carve up Bolivia, and with that to carve up South America because it is the epicenter of great changes that are advancing on a world scale.”

Morales has aligned Bolivia with the nemesis of the United States, Hugo Chavez of Venezuela. Along with President Rafael Correa of Ecuador, who is closing down the largest US military base on the continent, the three presidents constitute what can be called a radical axis in South America.

All three countries have convened constituent assemblies to draft new constitutions and to “refound” their nations. It is Bolivia’s new constitution that is to be voted on in a national referendum that has sparked the separatist opposition of the wealthy oligarchs in Santa Cruz. It grants autonomous rights to Bolivia’s majority indigenous population, places the country’s abundant mineral, gas and petroleum resources under greater national control, and sets limits on the size of the large landed estates that are heavily concentrated in Santa Cruz.

The Podemos (We Are Able) Party, which is strongest in Santa Cruz, first tried to use its control of just over one third of the votes in the constituent assembly to block its actions by insisting that a majority vote was not sufficient to approve statutes to the new constitution. When that failed, it resorted to helping stir up violence against assembly members, targeting its indigenous members and its woman president, Silvia Lazarte Flores. At the turn of the year, Evo Morales, backed by popular mobilizations in the streets of La Paz, compelled the existent Congress to approve the call for a national referendum to vote on the new constitution. It was then that the Santa Cruz elite launched its referendum for autonomy, which the country’s National Electoral Court has declared unconstitutional. The referendum voted for on Sunday grants the provincial government the power to tax and collect revenues, to set up its own police force and to block any efforts by the national government to carry out agrarian reform.

The US ambassador, Philip Goldberg, who was appointed by the Bush administration in September 2006, has maneuvered behind the scenes to support the political forces opposed to Morales and his governing party, the Movement Towards Socialism (MAS). It is notable that Goldberg came to Bolivia from Pristina, Kosovo, where as the US Chief of Mission, he played a central role in orchestrating Kosovo’s independence from Serbia, which it had been a province of for centuries.

Last year Goldberg was photographed in Santa Cruz with a leading right-wing business magnate and a well-known Colombian narco-trafficker who had been detained by the local police. Then in late January of this year, the Embassy was caught giving aid to a special intelligence unit of the Bolivian police force. The embassy rationalized its aid by saying “the US government has a long history of helping the National Police of Bolivia in diverse programs.” US-Bolivian relations were next roiled in February when it was revealed that Peace Corps volunteers and a Fulbright scholar had been pressured by an Embassy official to keep tabs on “Venezuelans and Cubans” in the country. Since Morales took office over two years ago, more than $4 million has been provided by the US Agency for International Development to the political opposition.

Bolivia’s neighbors are strongly opposed to the separatist movement and its destabilizing impact on the region. Brazil and Argentina are both dependent on natural gas from Bolivia and fear that an internal conflict would interrupt their supplies. Argentinean David Caputo came to Bolivia as head of a mission of the Organization of American States to try set up a dialogue between the government and the opposition. He found the government willing to engage in discussions, but the opposition vehemently opposed. The United States has provided no support to these regional diplomatic efforts to avoid civil strife in Bolivia.




© 2007 CENSA: Center for the Study of the Americas
2288 Fulton St., Suite 103, Berkeley,

New York Times MICHAEL GORDON takes up where JUDITH MILLER left off: PIMPING Goebbels' NAZI PROPAGANDA for MORE WARS, banging the drum of ANONYMOUS U

The shameless, soulless, war-mongering, tax-cuts-for-rich-in-time-of-war Neo-Con New York Times takes up where Joseph Goebbels left of.... EVER MORE WARS, EVER MORE EXPANDING WARS, in defense of the "good American volk" and in the interest of "state security uber alles", of course.
In particular, here Times reporter MICHAEL GORDON takes up where JUDITH MILLER had to leave off (because the LIES of her DISGRACEFUL reporting were so egregious and obvious, that even the Times was reluctantly forced to fire her) - PROMOTING ANONYMOUS Bush-Cheney administration "government sources" and statements as JUSTIFYING, demading an immediate attack on and BOMBING of Iran.

========================================

The Times' Michael Gordon: A "Message Force Multiplier?"
Posted May 5, 2008
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joseph-a-palermo/the-times-michael-gordon_b_100182.html

A few months back the United States' top 16 intelligence agencies produced a "National Intelligence Estimate" on Iran that exposed almost everything the Bush administration had been saying for years about the threatening nature of Iran's nuclear program as an elaborate web of lies. So embarrassing to the administration was the Iran NIE, which brought to mind the "smoking guns" and "mushroom clouds" that proved to be total fabrications leading up to the Iraq invasion, that even President George W. Bush found himself on the defensive and had to backtrack. Before the NIE threw dirt in the gears of the Bush war machine Michael Gordon had been a loud and prominent mouthpiece at The New York Times providing endless stenography for Bush and Cheney's most fear-inducing claims about Iran's nuclear capacity.

Michael Gordon shifted gears after the administration's new "mushroom cloud" stories failed to generate much buzz, and he then began flogging another anti-Iran story that the Bush administration and General David Petraeus wanted disseminated: the scary-sounding "explosively formed penetrators" (EFPs) coming from Iran into Iraq and doing harm to American soldiers. But after the EFP stories didn't do the trick to provoke an already war-weary American public into calling for US military action against Iran, Gordon is at it again, dutifully turning to his official sources -- the only ones he knows or cares about -- to generate more alarmist claims that just happen to serve perfectly the Bush administration's calls for some kind of an attack on Iran.

And what is the new pretext for war against Iran that US officials and their underlings inside the Iraqi government are now spoon-feeding Michael Gordon so he can splash it on the front page of The New York Times? Gordon's below-the-fold story in today's Times is entitled: "Hezbollah Trains Iraqi Militants In Iran, American Officials Say."

Now sometimes I'll bother to go in and dissect Gordon's articles and point out that he always quotes from official sources with no apparent effort at all on his part to place their claims in context -- especially the context of the fact that these same kinds of official sources lied to him about Saddam Hussein's "weapons of mass destruction." Gordon keeps flogging the attack Iran story for the Bush administration.

We recently found out the extent of the Pentagon's control of an elaborate propaganda network that sent dozens of retired military officers onto the public's television airwaves equipped with talking points so they could perform their duty as "message force multipliers." They told us that there was "no doubt" that Saddam had WMD, aluminum tubes to be used as nuclear centrifuges, flying drones that could gas an American city, that we'd be greeted as liberators, etc.

Gordon was the co-author with the infamous Judith Miller on a front-page article on Sunday, September 8, 2002 that probably did more to further the Bush administration's calls for war against Iraq than any other article published by anyone anywhere (mainly because Dick Cheney and other officials pointed to the Gordon-Miller article on the Sunday political talk shows giving their bogus claims legitimacy in the establishment "liberal" press).

We have become accustomed to having the views of people who were so wrong about Iraq thrown in our faces without accountability or even an acknowledgment that maybe we shouldn't listen to these people anymore. Yesterday's Times had short opinion pieces on what the US should do in Iraq from Frederick Kagan, Richard Perle, and Kenneth Pollack. Today's paper has Gordon's shrill stenography on the front page and William Kristol's sage views in the opinion section. These people never lose their high perches no matter how many of their past lies are exposed so they can tell us over and over again that this time they really can be trusted to interpret world.

I find it curious, and so should Michael Gordon, that every single time he gets an exclusive "scoop" from his official sources they invariably lead him to report events or issues that lead to greater tension between the US and Iran, and more importantly, they fit perfectly into the Bush Administration's goal of massaging public opinion into accepting the wisdom of a military strike against that country. Gordon knows that if the US did not invade and occupy Iraq and overthrow the Sunni government in Baghdad -- all actions his reporting helped facilitate -- the Shia would not be empowered in Iraq and Lebanon's Hezbollah, which has its hands full dealing with Israel, would be only a marginal player in Iraq if at all. But Gordon wants us to forget that history as if it is just a "back story" and become alarmed about Iran's role in Iraq and stiffen our spines for yet another war, which is exactly what the Bush administration wants. Thanks Again Mike!

America's WHORE, DEMAGOGUE, LYING media.. GIVES Republicans a FREE PASS for Rev Sung Yung Moon's HATE AMERICA preaching....

AS THE CORRUPT, WHORE, TREACHEROUS American media machine tries to make a 24-7-365 video-clip audio loop of Reverend Jeremiah Wright's 20 second misbegotten sermon clip, the Whore Media has to... work hard, to NOT report on the far more systematic, condemnatory, damning rhetoric of REVEREND SUNG YUNG MOON, notorious sponsor of mass weddings, self-anointed god on earth, self-anointed king of the World... and PAYMASTER of Bush Sr. speaking appearances, as well as owner and paymaster of the Washington DC right-wing propaganda 'news' paper, the WASHINGTON TIMES.

AMERICA'S TRAITOROUS, TREACHEROUS MEDIA WHORES will devote FAR MORE TIME to a TWENTY SECOND SOUND-CLIP from Reverend Wright, than they will to the PERVASIVE influence, and BILLIONS of dollars spent CORRUPTING the US political process - by the "Reverend" Sung Yung Moon.

FOREIGN DICTATORS - the SAUDI and Arab OIL KINGS, and the Rev. Sung Yung Moon - have FAR MORE IMPACT on the AMERICAN POLITICAL PROCESS, than millions and millions of Americans do!

The Washington Press corps: GROUND ZERO for press/media BUZZARDS to SELL OUT AMERICA, and SELL AMERICAN DEMOCRACY down the river, by relentlessly DEMAGOGIC REPETITION of minor issues, while AVOIDING THE FAR MORE IMPORTANT ONES.

It is indeed ironic, that as the Washington press corps vultures promote the notions of "patriotism" and defending America, they become ever more subservient to foreign dictators and demagogues like Rev. Moon.

===================================================
The Right-Wing's America-Hating Preacher 0 Rev. Sung Yung Moon
By Robert Parry (A Special Report)
May 2, 2008
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2008/050108.html


<< While Sen. Obama has to explain what he knew and when he knew it about Wright’s angry sermons, the Bush Family floats above its financial and political associations with the Rev. Sun Myung Moon, a South Korean theocrat who had denounced the United States as “Satan’s harvest” and likened American women to “prostitutes.”

In his angry sermons, Moon has gone further than saying “God-damn America” – as Wright did – to vowing to sweep aside American democracy and individualism as he builds a one-world state.

Once his plan to “swallow entire America” is complete, Moon told his followers in one sermon, there will be “some individuals who complain inside your stomach. However, they will be digested.”

But Moon’s hatred of America is not deemed news, in part, because Moon has financed the Washington Times since 1982 to the tune of more than $3 billion, according to former newspaper insider George Archibald.

Moon also has lavished many millions of dollars more to pay for conservative conferences and to bail out key right-wing figures when they have found themselves in financial distress, including Republican direct-mail guru Richard Viguerie and the late Jerry Falwell.

Plus, Moon has paid large speaking fees to former President George H.W. Bush – estimated in the millions of dollars – and has feted President George W. Bush’s brother Neil at recent events for the Moon-sponsored Universal Peace Federation.

In 2004, thankful Republicans even gave Moon use of a room in the Senate Dirksen Office Building so he could be crowned the “King of Peace” in a ceremony that Moon’s followers hailed as proof the U.S. government was bowing down to this new Messiah. [See John Gorenfeld’s Bad Moon Rising.]

Yet, even though Moon has gained influence by funneling huge sums of mysterious money into the U.S. political process – and to the Bush Family – he has avoided the intense scrutiny that has fallen on Rev. Wright, who until recently was a little-known black preacher from Chicago’s South Side. >>

Mo Dowd - the "Shallow and Tawdry" Maureen Dowd, entitled hack columnist for New York Times - taken to woodshed for her trashy sourcing....

MoDowd’s Dubious Sourcing Standards
Who is her “Hillary Democrat” and why does he/she get to bash Obama with impunity?
By Zachary Roth
Wed 30 Apr 2008
http://www.cjr.org/campaign_desk/modowds_dubious_sourcing_stand_1.php?page=all

A few years ago, The New York Times made an admirable move to cut down on its use of anonymous sources. A memo by assistant managing editor Allan Siegal asked newsroom staffers: “Can we…squeeze more anonymous sources out of our pages? Can we make our attributions (even the anonymous ones) less murky?”

Since then, when the Times has used anonymous sources, it’s been noticeably more conscientious about explaining why it was doing so. But judging by this passage from her column today, Maureen Dowd didn’t get Siegal’s memo:

For some, Obama didn’t offer enough outrage. “He talks about Reverend Wright violating his core beliefs as if he is detailing why he doesn’t like cheesecake or cream cheese,” said one Hillary Democrat. “He’s more passionate about basketball.”
Sure, columnists operate according to slightly different rules than regular news reporters. But is there any possible reason why granting anonymity to this “Hillary Democrat” to go after Obama is justifiable in any format? The source could be anyone, meaning there’s no way to assess his or her credibility, or to know whether he or she represents a more widespread response.

Would the Times allow an anonymous Obama or Clinton supporter to be quoted saying: “John McCain talks about people who’ve lost their homes to the mortgage crisis as if they ordered mustard on their sandwich and got mayo”? Let’s hope not.

We’ll wrap this post up with some crack reporting, Dowd-style:

For some, Maureen Dowd’s use of a “Hillary Democrat” to attack Obama is shallow and tawdry. “Attacking one candidate by quoting unnamed supporters of their opponent is the cheapest form of journalism imaginable, and it tells readers nothing,” said one Obama Democrat. “If Obama didn’t offer enough outrage for her, why doesn’t she so say in her own words?”

New York Times circulation plummets. In economic hard times, who can afford to pay attention to a lyin' rag?

As we have relentlessly stated here at MediaWhoresUSA, the New York Times, despite its "LIBERAL" reputation, is actually a rag with a DISTINCTLY RIGHT-WING, MORE WARS, TAX CUTS FOR THE WEALTHY bias.
No further proof is needed to support our assessment than for over a dozen years FORMER NIXON SPEECHWRITER - and UNREPETENT Nixon CRIMES APOLOGIST William Safire was the Times' #1. sydnicated columnist.
#2. After Safire departed the Times, he came back to pen an article, "FALUJAH MUST BE PUNSHED!" for the murder and body-burning of Blackwater mercenaries (oops! "security contractors") who had wandered into Fallujah without a decent respect for that hotbed of Sunni pro-Saddam resentment, or a sufficient US military escort.
Sure enough, Fallujah was POUNDED by US military might - if not erased off the map LIDICE style (all members exterminated or shipped off to death camps by Nazi SS units, the town levelled and erased off the map in retaliation for the assassination of SS General Reinhard Heydrich ) then certainly GUERNICA style, the city that inspired Pablo Picasso's famous mural after the Nazi air force bombed the Republican city resisting General Franco's forces during the Spanish civil war that was a prelude to the bombed-out cities of WWII.
WILLIAM SAFIRE, from the pages of THE NEW YORK TIMES, DEMANDED that US firepower be used on Fallujah to "root out terrorists" .. in the same exact way that the WARSAW GHETTO was "cleansed" of partisans and resistance during WWII - and people still have the impression that the Times is a "liberal" newspaper!

So, we here at MediaWhoresUSA are happy to report that the Times CIRCULATION is GOING DOWN.

ALL they have to do to REVERSE THAT COURSE, to REGAIN THEIR LOST READERS, is for the Times to START REPORTING HONESTLY -
#1. On Dick Cheney's vast CORRUPTION - his HALLIBURTON STOCK-OPTIONS portfolio, his vast corruption in crony, no-bid contracts, his "Secret Energy Task Force" of 2001 (which, duh, was dedicated to making America DEPENDENT ON OIL, thereby leading directly to America's TRILLION-DOLLAR DEFICITS;
#2. in Bush's MALEVOLENT ARROGANCE and incompetence re the FEMA DISGRACE when the FEDERAL LEVEES FAILED, flooding New Orleans...
#3. or here's a dynamite headline grabber the CORRUPT TIMES _REFUSES_ to investigate, the CORRUPTION and STOLEN ELECTIONS inherent in the corporatized, privatized, NO oversight voting machines. (By comparison, EVERY LINE of computer code for Law Vegas casino slot-machines are rigorously inspected by state inspectors, because it is SO EASY TO RIG THEM, to insert a few lines of code to siphon off a portion of the machine's take)

THESE are just THREE BLOCKBUSTER circulation-boosting Stories the CORRUPT, NEO-CON, WAR-MONGERING NEW YORK SLIMES under owner/publisher Aruthur Sulzberger, and his LYING, CORRUPT EDITORS, REFUSE to investigate!

THE STUPID, LYING, CORRUPT, THIEVING, ELECTION-STEALING BASTARDS at the New York Times would PREFER to talk about.... The Reverend Wright's statements, on endless loop, even though Rev. Wright (and millions of other African-Americans) RECALL THE ERA OF SEGREGATION, where they could indeed have been beaten, murdered, or arrested for trying to assert their 15th Amendment Rights!

They see the DEVASTATION and SMOKE from the destroyed 9-11 towers... and side with the Bush-Cheney White House "ALL that devastation IN OUR OWN CITY.... is a PERFECT EXCUSE to DEFRAUD the American public out of MORE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS, with the pathetic, farcical, 9-11 Commission white-wash! (The Commissioners have practically cried that, despite their commission powers, they weren't informed of CIA Director Tenet's July 2001 visit TO THE WHITE HOUSE, SPECIFICALLY TO inform the National Security Advisor and "other White House senior officials" that Al Qaeda was in ADVANCED STAGES of PLANNING AN ATTACK ON or in America!!)
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C03E2DB1139F935A25756C0A9649C8B63

IF the New York WHORE Times did some HONEST reporting on those GENUINE issues, they would see a ZOOM IN SALES, but their publisher and editors PREFER TO BE RIGHT-WING LIARS, who see it as their duty to HIDE and COVER UP the crimes of the Bush-Cheney White House. Which is exactly why we must publish this "MEDIA WHORES USA" website - because ARTHUR SULBERGER and his crew of neo-con HACKS at the NEW YORK TIMES are PAID PROFESSIONAL LIARS, who put the Neo-Con, deficits-and-slavery agenda ahead of the economic strength and welfare of the America people.

=========================================

New York Times Circulation Plummets
SETH SUTEL
April 28, 2008
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/28/emnew-york-timesem-circul_n_98991.html


Read More: New York Times, New York Times Circulation, Newspaper Circulation, Breaking Media News Show your support.
Buzz this article up. Buzz up!
Like this story? Get Alerts of big news events. Enter your email address

NEW YORK — Circulation fell sharply at most top U.S. newspapers in the latest reporting period, an industry group said Monday, with the exception of the two largest national dailies, USA Today and The Wall Street Journal.

Those papers eked out gains of under 1 percent, while The New York Times, the No. 3 paper, fell 3.9 percent in the six months ending in March, according to the Audit Bureau of Circulations.

Newspaper circulation has been on a declining trend since the 1980s but the pace of declines has picked up in recent years as reader habits change and more people go online for news, information and entertainment.

National newspapers like USA Today and the Journal have tended to hold their ground better, as have smaller-market dailies where competition from other media like the Internet isn't usually as intense.

Gannett Co.'s USA Today remained the top-selling paper in the country with an average daily circulation of, 2,284,219, up 0.3 percent, while The Wall Street Journal rose 0.4 percent to 2,069,463. Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. bought the Journal's parent company Dow Jones & Co. last December.

The New York Times Co.'s flagship paper remained the third-largest with circulation of 1,077,256, down 3.9 percent from the same period a year earlier. That company also owns The Boston Globe and International Herald Tribune.

Metropolitan dailies have suffered the worst declines, a trend that continued in the most recent reporting period, with the Dallas Morning News reporting a 10.6 percent drop to 368,313.

The Dallas paper's corporate owner A.H. Belo Corp., newly spun out of broadcasting company Belo Corp., said as part of its earnings statement Monday that the company was culling back on less valuable circulation such as copies distributed through third parties.

Other metro dailies also posted steep declines, including The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, down 8.5 percent to 326,907, and the Star Tribune of Minneapolis-St. Paul, down 6.7 percent to 321,984.

Declines at other major papers were less severe, with the New York Daily News narrowly keeping the upper hand on its crosstown tabloid rival, Rupert Murdoch's New York Post. The Daily News posted a 2.1 percent decline to 703,137, while the Post fell 3.1 percent to 702,488.

Both Murdoch and Daily News owner Mortimer Zuckerman are going after Tribune Co.'s Newsday on neighboring Long Island. Newsday, meanwhile, posted a 4.7 percent decline in circulation to 379,613.

The twice-yearly report from the Audit Bureau includes figures from most major U.S. newspapers but not the entire industry. At the nearly 550 papers that reported comparable figures for both periords, average daily circulation fell 3.6 percent in the most recent period.

Several smaller to mid-size papers posted gains, including a Spanish-language daily in New York called El Diario La Prensa, up 7.6 percent to 53,856, while The Times in Munster, Ind., owned by Lee Enterprises Inc., rose 3 percent to 86.195.

The Chicago Sun-Times, reporting for the first time since being censured in 2004 for circulation misstatements, posted circulation of 312,274, but no prior-year numbers were available for comparison.

Tony Snow, former Bush WH press spokesman, joins CNN; "Democrat" Speaker Pelosi makes nice with Repub Demagogue Newt Gingrich...

Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the nominal "leader" of the Democrat Party, joined with former Republican Speaker of the House NEWT GINGRICH to make a short ad urging viewers to take part in efforts to reduce global warming. But the TV ad probably did more to legitimize the Radical Right Republican agenda than it did to urge environmental action in America, because the same week that Pelosi cut her ad with Gingrich, Gingrich told Fox 'news' host Sean Hannity:
"the left wing of the Democratic Party, frankly, kind of admires American terrorists."
Video at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/19/gingrich-left-wing-of-the_n_97584.html

Well, that is TYPICAL of the 'Democratic' "leadership" of this past decade: DO WHATEVER IT TAKES to LEGITIMIZE and/or support the speakers who advocate the Radical Right-Wing agenda!

Speaking of, Tony Snow, the White House press spokesman who helped Bush and Cheney dodge so many scandals - (torture, lies-to-war, outing of CIA agents as part of a White House vendetta against a prominent war critic; and the perjury and obstruction of justice to cover up that scandal past the 2004 election, to name just a few)- is now a new CNN news talking head.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/21/tony-snow-joins-cnn-as-po_n_97824.html
<< Tony Snow is joining CNN as a conservative commentator, the network announced today. Snow, who spent 10 years at Fox News, left his job as White House Press Secretary in September, saying he needed to make more money to support his family. >>


Hat tip to Arianna Huffington, who caught the "Speaker Pelosi LEGITIMIZING demagogue Newt Gingrich 'Democrats love terrorists'" juxtaposition, and who sums it up perfectly here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/the-toxic-thinking-of-the_b_98040.html
<< As it happened, I first saw the Pelosi-Gingrich ad on the same night that I caught Gingrich telling Sean Hannity that "the left wing of the Democratic Party, frankly, kind of admires American terrorists." A more outrageous statement would be hard to find. But instead of consigning Gingrich to the slagheap reserved for the likes of Rep. Steve "al Qaeda Will Be Dancing in the Streets if Obama Wins" King, Pelosi -- who according to Gingrich is enamored of home-grown terrorists -- scooches in next to him, smiles for the camera, and enhances his legitimacy as a statesman and champion of reasoned compromise. >>

IF Speaker Pelosi had a GENUINE COMMITTMENT to reversing Global Warming, SHE COULD HAUL THE EXECUTIVES of CHEVRON corporation before Congress, and ask them "WHY DID YOU SUE Toyota and Panisonic companies to FORCE THEM TO QUIT PRODUCING NiMH batteries - that were working in a PRODUCTION Toyota SUV, the RAV4-EV, which got THREE TIMES BETTER mileage-per-energy-dollar than its identical looking gas-powered siblings?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_RAV4_EV

The Solution to America's ENERGY GLUTTONY is staring us in the face: SOLAR PANELS do NOT require a Manhatten Project, Apollo program, Cold War, much less WWII level of committment, investment, sacrifice, or research in unproven science: the TECHNOLOGY IS HERE, NOW, but any NATIONAL committment to creating huge solar farms is COMPLETELY CORRUPTED BY CONGRESS' DEPENDENCE on big corporate donors.

Google corporation is currently producing almost 30% of its "Googleplex" research complex energy needs... from SOLAR PANELS installed on the office building roofs.
Imagine how much power could be produced if the United States spent $500 billion - a fraction of the cost our our exporting war to the Mideast - on installing similar solar panels all over the country, and making the design, production, installation, and integration of those solar farms more efficient in terms of relentless improvements that large-scale research and production would bring?
http://www.google.com/corporate/solarpanels/home

The DISGRACEFUL, chronically LYING New York Times GETS THEIR COME-UPPANCE: Times in deep financial trouble. Serves the liars right....

"HELP!" Arthur "Pinch" Sulzberger, his newspaper the GROUND ZERO of Republican (and DIN))neo-con LIES for the past decade, is seeking a big, strong investor to rescue his old grey whore of a newspaper.

from Wiki: "Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, Jr. (born 22 September 1951) became the publisher of The New York Times in 1992 and chairman of The New York Times Company in 1997."

<< "I am not going to go into the newspaper business," Bloomberg said when asked by reporters at a press conference to discuss city affairs. "I am not a newspaper person."

The comments come after intense speculation Bloomberg could join the ranks of billionaires who have the financial heft to rescue a deteriorating U.S. newspaper business [the New York Times]...

The Times arguably may be the crown jewel of U.S. journalism, but it is dealing with a steady decline in ad revenue at its flagship paper and other papers such as the Boston Globe, a slump that has hit the entire industry. >>

THE TIMES under Arthur Sulzberger has become THE MOUTHPIECE, THE MEGAPHONE, THE LIGITIMIZING press outlet for the LIES, STOLEN ELECTIONS, BUSTED BUDGETS, LOOTED TREASURY, gross dereliction of duty leading up to the 9-11 attacks, LIES-TO-WAR and illegal invasion of Iraq, the grossly incompetent post-invasion and GROSSLY CORRUPT occupation, TORTURE, JOB OUTSOURCING, TECHNOLOGY OUTSOURCING, FALLING DOLLAR, and ECONOMIC DECLINE of the United States of America - ALL the above the SIGNATURE AGENDA of the Neo-Con "TAX CUTS FOR WEALTHY in time of EVER-EXPANDING WARS under the Bush-Cheney administration.

EACH, and every one of the above issues would merit PULITZER-PRIZE WINNING JOURNALISM were the LYING publisher and editor of the Times to FORCEFULLY, AGGRESSIVELY, and PERSISTENTLY FOLLOW the DIRECT LINKS between Bush-Cheney-Republic neo-con policy and their inevitible deleterious effects on American security and the American economy. THIS the Mr. Sulzberger and the Times REFUSE TO DO (except for the once-weekly articles by Paul Krugman and Frank Rich).

THEREFORE, ANY ONE READING the New York Times - at least on its national and international 'news' coverage - IS READING A PACK OF LIES.

Lies intended to JUSTIFY that TAX CUTS FOR WEALTHY CORPORATIONS agenda, Mr. Sulzberger and minions putting the wealth and power of the establishment FAR OVER their committment to honest journalism, much less to the American public.

IF everything the Times writes and publishes about international affairs are Bush-Cheney-Rove whitewash LIES; and if their DOMESTIC REPORTING can't even uncover the LOOTING of the ENTIRE US TREASURY - for at least a decade in the future! - THEN WHEY THE HELL would anyone bother reading the Lyin' Times????

===========================================

Bloomberg says not interested in newspaper business
Mon Apr 21, 2008
By Edith Honan and Robert MacMillan
http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN2141377620080421?feedType=RSS&feedName=domesticNews&rpc=22&sp=true

NEW YORK (Reuters) - New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg on Monday dismissed media reports that he could be a suitor for the New York Times Co, saying he is not interested in getting into the newspaper industry.

"I am not going to go into the newspaper business," Bloomberg said when asked by reporters at a press conference to discuss city affairs. "I am not a newspaper person."

The comments come after intense speculation Bloomberg could join the ranks of billionaires who have the financial heft to rescue a deteriorating U.S. newspaper business.

The Times arguably may be the crown jewel of U.S. journalism, but it is dealing with a steady decline in ad revenue at its flagship paper and other papers such as the Boston Globe, a slump that has hit the entire industry.

The Times's financial performance and sliding share price has sparked anger among its outside investors, some of whom have publicly blasted its executives for poor management.

The New York Post reported on Monday that some members of the Times's controlling Ochs-Sulzberger family would be receptive to the idea of a protector.

Bloomberg, who founded financial news and information service Bloomberg LP before becoming mayor, has been encouraged by his close associates to make a bid for the Times and save it from shareholder anger, Newsweek said in its April 28 edition.

Bloomberg could take the company private and "help protect the brand" with his estimated $11.6 billion personal fortune, Newsweek said, quoting an unnamed source.

Speculation on Bloomberg and the Times has surfaced in the past, but the mayor scoffed at the idea on Monday.

"I don't know why anybody keeps pushing this," he said.

New York Times shares closed up 5.5 percent.

BLOOMBERG'S NEXT MOVE

Some of the conjecture stems from curiosity over Bloomberg's next move after his term ends in December 2009. Political observers thought for years he would run for U.S. president, but the mayor threw cold water on those plans.

Former New York Mayor Ed Koch said Bloomberg could still be expected to seek a big new role if he leaves City Hall.

"I cannot believe that he'll be happy just simply being the head of a $15 billion foundation, just giving out money," Koch told Reuters.

The Times is also facing a bold move by News Corp chief Rupert Murdoch to lead the U.S. news agenda with closer political coverage in his Wall Street Journal newspaper.

Bloomberg is considered one of the savviest business minds in the industry and even Murdoch has said he would not relish going up against him, according to Newsweek.

The family believes the company's current capital structure, which gives it control through a special tier of shares, is the best way to protect its editorial independence, a Times spokeswoman said. Analysts also downplayed the idea.

"All of this is just rumor-mongering in the first place," said veteran newspaper analyst John Morton.

Changing the family's control over the Times would be like a "snowball melting in hell," he said.

But the Times has already shown some signs of relenting to criticism. Last month, the company agreed to support two board nominees put forward by an outside shareholder, hedge fund Harbinger Capital Management.

If elected at a shareholder meeting on Tuesday, they would be the first outside directors at the company since it went public. Harbinger and board nominee Scott Galloway of Firebrand Partners have urged changes at the Times, including possibly selling off properties and accelerating its move into digital.

Thomson Reuters Corp competes with Bloomberg in providing financial news and information.

(Additional reporting by Paul Thomasch; Editing by Tim Dobbyn/Andre Grenon)